OR... you could simply read comment 79 to see why I asked that question.

Comment 79, where you said it puts context on who another person was as a backer. That does not say "why" that simply implies this person's five hundred dollar contribution and early status as a backer met your threshold of acceptability.

How much a person invested should not be relevant to the conversation and is in fact entirly irrelevant. If some one gave 5 dollars or 5000 dollars they are invested in the game and deserve a voice. That voice is no greater or lesser than anyone else's.

I understand you are unhappy, I'm unhappy too. At the best of times I'm cautiously optimistic but I have very little to no faith in Roberts to deliver. Not because of "late additions" FPS was in from early on and was something that was quite clear during the Kickstarter campaign but because they continually flub deadlines and then flub the messaging around them. They are, at best, unprofessional and that concens me as it does you. But they way you are expressing it is not entirely constructive and helps foster the attitude of "us vs. them" which is not constructive. The adent fans of CIG and Star Citizen are ridiculous, with far less funding and far less time Elite proved to be a far more playable game (focusing only on the Arena mode and the space combat aspect). Now Fun and Playable are two different things but that's a different story.

That said, I will never question the validity of a person's opinion based on their investment and even if that's not what you intended to do that's what you communicated. Like CIG your message is befuddled.

Kxmode wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 17:00:I lead back to my earlier comment: "I have absolutely no ill-will against the community, but at times they make me sigh." Here's two examples:Comments like these are the reason I LEFT the RSI forums.

And comments like yours are the reason why I don't go on there at all either. First you truncated my comment down editing it to take it out of context. Second, I actually agree with you for the most part, CIG is doing a terrible job at managing this project, they are poorly communicating their goals, and they are still yet to produce a game I enjoy. That said, I don't go around implying that people who disagree with me have an opinion that's invalid.

The realities is Roberts has failed on multiple projects with him being reduced to a figure head on his last big studio project because he was unable to deliver. This has filled me with concerns.

What I do is communicate those things, what I don't do is imply that some one who hasn't dumped 1000 dollars on a project is not as good as me. I was an early kickstarter backer BUT I only placed 35 dollars down. You know why? Because I wasn't sure it was going to go through and I did my due diligence (actually having been a gamer since the 70s I was well familiar with Roberts' track record). Fruther, since then, I've only purchased one ship moving me up to 50 dollars. Again, I restricted my funding to a minimal amount so if I don't get anything out of it I have not broken my bank and I'm not going to feel upset.

Do I think people who spend 1000 dollars on the game (or more as some have) are foolish? Not really my place to judge, that's their money to do with as they please, but I do consider it a high risk. Going on about it though is at best gauche and at worst a power play to imply superiority over other backers.

You may think I'm a plebe who's not as worthy because my pledge doesn't come anywhere near yours. I would counter that I was being strategic and investing only what I felt comfortable. That they are refusing your refund based on your feelings that they have not lived up to their promise, that is unfortunate and I can sympathise with that. That said, crowdfunding is a gamble and going in to that you should be aware. That you gambled poorly, well again, that is on you.

Kxmode wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 15:45:theyarecomingforyou, zor I'm going to ask both of you two very important questions. When did you back and for how much?

I backed for $930 since 1/2013 (Veteran backer status).

Oh for goodness sake put your e-pee away! I agree they have been doing a poor job communicating but you going on about how you gave almost 1000 dollars (multiple times now) just comes across as either braging or sour grapes. Your further complaints about how there needs to be changes to how crowd sourcing works highlights the latter.

Honestly when Star Citizen popped crowd funding was not new and there were more than enough questionable projects to cause people to be cautious. If you dumped 1000 on an incomplete project then that is on you. Its relevance to the project and it making you more qualified than others to speak about it is nill.

Tipsy McStagger wrote on Jun 29, 2015, 15:06:Did anyone here actually order one of these?

I picked up the controller and the Steam Link but only because I want to review the hardware for my site I don't really have particularly high expectations from the controller and I can already stream games to my TV through other methods from Steam.

007Bistromath wrote on Mar 25, 2015, 14:55:So you're going to forgive the Molyneuxian over-promising, the disingenuous e-begging, the abandoned projects, and the fact that he got up on stage and said "fuck you" to hundreds of people that gave him money to do all that shit because of what amounts to a petty internet bitchfit between people who like games and people who like to make money writing about games?

I don't, no - I'm quite angry with Double Fine specifically about the DF-9 situation, and don't expect I'll back any of their crowdfunding efforts again. As a company they've definitely squandered a lot of my trust with that one. But I don't really see much Molyneuxian over-promising from Schafer. In fact, Broken Age is far grander in scope than promised originally.

What's this "Fuck you" thing though? Did that actually happen? Maybe I did miss something.

Apparently he's bent about the Gamergate jokes at GDC because as is readily shown time and time again Gators can "make fun of" or "joke" about who ever they want but some one pokes them in the ribs it's all about the boycots and banning and censorship and burn and destroy. Maybe if people who were supporting of "ethics in journalism" didn't fly off the handle when ever anyone gave them even half the stick they give other people would take them a bit more seriously.

SpectralMeat wrote on Mar 16, 2015, 09:03:I wonder how much those ships are going to cost in game.

That's something I've been really wondering. They say every ship will be able to be purchased in game but if it's prohibitively expensive that may not be worth it (though if there are ways to make big space bucks may be okay). These are the details that are going to make the difference for me with regards to the game. I'm sitting on my space bucks until there's more stuff to buy (go 25,000). May poke around the store this weekend but I'm curious when they are going to share these numbers.

Drayth wrote on Mar 9, 2015, 16:10:There's not enough popcorn in the world for this thread.

Honestly, half the time I read the comments on stories here just to see how low the discussion will sink. Some of the comments are the most bitter angry nonsensical rage posts I've seen in years. Reminds me of the good old days on usenet.

This leads me to believe the SteamBox initiative is dead. This is actually more along the lines of what most people were looking for. An inexpensive way to play games where ever. There was no way I was goign to buy a Steambox when I have a multi-thousand dollar gaming rig in my office (nor would my wife let me given she's already putting up with me havint two consoles in the living room) but this inexpensive option allows for all the flexibility of a PC in the living room with a low overhead.

They've tested the technology, I've been doing it between my wife's laptop and my PC for months. It's solid so this makes sense, now if they start letting applications like Plex enter the equation then they'd have a killer device.

CJ_Parker wrote on Mar 3, 2015, 22:07:What the fuck is up with all of that streaming hype anyway? Is there any other practical scenario for it other than watching let's plays while fucking your wife?

Well for example my PS4 is in my living room, I write reviews for a blog which means some times I have to plow through a game due to a self imposed timeline and the wife wants to watch her programs. I can go downstairs to my office and use my PSTV to link up and play games on my office monitor instead of upstairs. It basically unlocks the gaming experience from a particular room. Unless you are taking streaming as the narrow band view but it's pretty clear that when they use the word streaming they mean streaming in the sense you are streaming the output of one device one way and the input from another device the other way. This isn't let's play type stuff this is desktop sharing stuff.

jdreyer wrote on Mar 3, 2015, 20:13:So will/can/how do controllers work with the streaming content?

How can the controllers linked to the computer upstairs communicate with the TV downstairs?

Given that you can already do this with their extant client (ie. have Steam logged in on two computers you can stream from one machine to another over your LAN) I'm suspecting this is going to be a USB driven device or micro computer using a thin client SteamOS install. All the heavy lifting will be done on your PC and using something that they've been able to do for about a year (at least) they are now just putting a bow on it and selling it to people. This is actually probably closer to what people want out of a SteamBox than what is being brought to market with that name. As for how, just your wifi. I have been able to play games on my wife's crappy laptop just as smoothly as my PC downstairs and that's running over wifi. Anyhow, time will tell.

Cutter wrote on Jan 5, 2015, 18:01:Pretty cool, but the whole tiered free and premium crap leaves me cold. Just sell a complete damn product already. I'd still rather have a proper new NWN however, sigh.

You want some apples for those oranges? NWN is nothing at all like this, that's like saying "Well that's a nice boat but I want an airplane". This is a virtual table top for people to run games, the tiered product is so players can get the product without having to play and the GM can use the product.

Also it's basically in infinite trial period. My GM in Australia was running a game with people in North America and the UK for years didn't pay. I paid for the service because I wanted access to the locked out features like line of sight and lighting but if you are playing a role playing game like D&D none of that is even needed. The product is complete, they are just letting people try it out first.

I know you're the local curmudgeon Cutter but try and at least keep it vaguely related. When you pull NWN in to the equation you look like you are pulling at straws to come up with something to complain about.

Oh pleas, when will you trolls stop? Curmudgeon? How? Better go through my post history, scooter, because the positive far outweighs the negative. And I don't start the shit, I respond to it. People want to start fights, that's fine, I'll oblige them. If a game deserves criticism there's nothing surly about calling it as such. Sometimes, you just have to call a spade a spade, chief.

And obviously one of these things is not like the other. How long did it take for you to figure that out, sport? If you had half a brain, you'd understand what it was I was actually saying. I was PnPing before you were an accident in your mom.

I somehow doubt it kiddo (and trust me I've probably got quite a few years on you) it takes a little more than calling some one a curmudgeon to be considered trolling but your delicate sensibilities at times really seem like it can't take what it dishes.

You start by complaining about the "incomplete product" and then wrap it up with what you are saying is a lame joke about wanting NWN. Trust me squirt, you don't know what you're talking about having used the free product for some time before paying for it.

Cutter wrote on Jan 5, 2015, 18:01:Pretty cool, but the whole tiered free and premium crap leaves me cold. Just sell a complete damn product already. I'd still rather have a proper new NWN however, sigh.

You want some apples for those oranges? NWN is nothing at all like this, that's like saying "Well that's a nice boat but I want an airplane". This is a virtual table top for people to run games, the tiered product is so players can get the product without having to play and the GM can use the product.

Also it's basically in infinite trial period. My GM in Australia was running a game with people in North America and the UK for years didn't pay. I paid for the service because I wanted access to the locked out features like line of sight and lighting but if you are playing a role playing game like D&D none of that is even needed. The product is complete, they are just letting people try it out first.

I know you're the local curmudgeon Cutter but try and at least keep it vaguely related. When you pull NWN in to the equation you look like you are pulling at straws to come up with something to complain about.

Julio wrote on Dec 18, 2014, 19:17:I just haven't found any of the Telltale games good that I've tried. The story should be exceptionally exciting for these ones. I can only hope this is Xbox exclusive.

So I'm guessing you didn't read to the third bullet point where it said it was coming out on all platforms and consoles including iOS and Android.

Julio wrote on Dec 17, 2014, 09:30:Valve has taken the right approach on this, if they wanted to censor games they'd also have to take down GTA. And they wouldn't want to have to do that.

Except they do censor games, they censor content that they view is "offensive" mainly games with erotic content or "pornography". It's the hypocrisy here that I find galling. They have the right to pull content if they please. That's fine but they need to be consistent. Right now they're saying Japanese H Games (not my bag) are not cool but this is. Their TOS is vague enough they could have taken a stand and it's not censorship (censorship would be demanding changes to content to get carrying) it's deciding on what gets carried in their store which is a vendor's perogative. They are now lending credence to the removal of curatoralship duties from the platform.

What comes of that is neither here nor there but it simply illustrates at the fact this is a company with a severe lack of direction and problems at the upper management level you don't appoint some one to make these kinds of decisions and simply override them. It simply means that while they may have "street cred" they are never going to be anything more than they are. To grow you need talent that doesn't think it's going to be contradicted at the drop of a hat. That simply doesn't exist, and it's simply a matter of time before Steam collapses under itself.

shul wrote on Dec 17, 2014, 09:16:I'm sorry, but I've watched the trailer and the game makes me sick.

I know that if I don't like it I don't need to play it but putting stuff like that out there is like poisoning minds.

Maybe that is the point?? Maybe its supposed to make you sick, the same way a shocking book or movie is supposed to shock you, leave an impact, and some food for thought. There is no way to tell until the game hits the shelves and we learn some more about the story (or the lack of one).

Actually no, the creator said it didn't have that point specifically it was to push back at the concept of having to have a story and was there to just "enjoy" the killing. It could be said to be making a "statement" by it's lack of "statement" but if it is it's a regressive one.

They cost $1 billion per year of taxpayer moneyThey are a propaganda machine for the left (Liberals/NDP)They don't supply anything that is unavailable in the free market

Except that's not quite true, while you say they don't offer anything that's not available in the "free market" that's proven false with the closure of several mid-market local affiliates at CTV and Global. Rogers has also dialed down local City teams so outside of the CBC there is little to no news or media representation (and certainly no radio representation) for much of Canada outside the major urban centres.

Second regarding "propaganda machine" that's pretty untrue. They've equally held the "left" to account for mistakes in the past. As mentioned it was the CBC who led the charge in the "Ad Scam" Sponsorship Scandal. Now that the CBC has turned their attention to the repeated violations of public trust that the "Conservative" party have taken part in they're no longer quite so popular despite the CBC being responsible for the lion's share of the investigative work that turned the tables on the Liberals. The duty of the CBC is to be critical of the party in power and has repeatedly done so under multiple regimes while CTV and the Sun media network have blindly posted propaganda for the Conservatives with regular frequency (look at the recent back peddle that SunTV had to do regarding a recording where they misidentified the speaker as being a liberal representative thanks to a mole placed by the Conservatives at a candidate meeting). The desire of the "Conservatives" to shut down the CBC is much more akin to their work silencing scientists. Anyone critical of their political position is silenced.

A fiscal argument is viable one to make but despite the fact that a large number of people want to sell the CBC the majority still do not favour that option and at this point it's still considered to fill a viable cultural need by many people.

Nothing is bad about them, they fulfill an important role in allowing for local TV to areas that would be otherwise under serviced. It's an unfortunate reality they've been demonized within some circles but they've been good at holding all parties accountable (they were equally as critical of the Liberals and the Conservatives should remember if it wasn't for the CBC's reporting on "AdScam" they would not be in power today).

I hope people recognize this is not actually happening nor is it likely to happen. This is a single note on a research brief from an investment analyst. Basically he's laying out the potential opportunities for growth and setting out what the outcome would be. Essentially he's saying "if this was to go down it'd be a good idea to buy buy buy". This is why much of the "gaming" community can't hold a grown up discussion they see a passing note in an investment analysis and freak the fuck out like it's a done deal ignoring the fact that 2K have resisted offers from nearly as large fish before.

This is not a big company with its sites set on a little company this is two great big companies on equal footing and some one vaguely mentioning "yeah they'd go good together" like making up fantasy romances between Hollywood stars like "oh wouldn't George Clooney look so good as Julia Roberts' boy friend". People need to think about how the real world works before they over react (not so much talking about here but in general the comments in some places are just freaking insane).

Oh and Slick 100% agree with you on all but one point, you said that people don't care about the budget woes of Hollywood films, people are just as obsessive about that stuff as they are about video games. Every industry has it's inside baseball obsessives just gamers are insanely over the top about it.